You are replying to me.
It seems a bit dishonest to attempt to paint my position like that.
Small particles of the host - why no concern?
- Thread starter HomeschoolDad
- Start date
- Status
It seems a bit dishonest to attempt to paint my position like that.
J
JMMJ
Guest
I think the whole thread is ridiculous.
The choice to follow and respond to it is yours.
I was an altar server back in the 1950s .vz71:
When the priest breaks the host, I promise you microscopic particles fly all over the place. You can’t see it, but it happens. This isn’t a problem for God. We shouldn’t make it a problem, since it isn’t one.
We used to hold the communion plate under the chin of the communicants .
On one occasion the upper dentures of a lady fell out as she opened her mouth to receive . She managed to catch them , but it was VERY difficult for me to keep a straight face afterwards .
A priest once upset the ciborium , the contents of which fell to the floor .
I recall only once the consecrated host being dropped . That was in the Underground Basilica in Lourdes . I gestured to the priest , and he picked up the host .
I don’t recall any particles falling to the floor or onto the communion plate , but as you say and as I have been told on several occasions , microscopic particles fly all over the place .
Last edited:
P
Paul_Edwards
Guest
Actually, the ICKSP which Is in full communion with Rome, as far as I’m aware, Instructs its priests to not ever give communion in the hand, similar is the case with the FSSP. At St Mary’s in Warrington where I go sometimes, which is FSSP as they was invited by the Bishop have that church, the newsletter says every week:
“in the EF liturgy, holy communion is receiving kneeling (unless able to) and always on the tongue. If no server, please hold the communion plate against your throat. Thank you in advance”.
I remember an ICKSP priest telling me once about someone who grabbed the hosts and threw them on the flood in anger because they couldn’t review in the hand. This shows who that mans desires were actually coming from and what they thought of Our Lord.
The ICKSP and FSSP both fully approved, and similar groups, show their high safeguarding of the blessed sacrament this way during their EF masses, and they also hold their forefinger and thumb together from the consecration until the purification for the same purpose - to stop particles falling or from them ending up imprinted into pages in the missal or imprinted onto the handle of the chalice etc
Last edited:
P
Paul_Edwards
Guest
Once I was holding a communion plate under someone’s tongue and as the priest put communion in their mouth they must’ve bitten slightly to early because a massive chunk of host landed on the plate - in a normal parish God would have undoubtedly fallen on the floor on that day. If that day we didn’t use a plate I don’t know what would’ve happened perhaps we wouldn’t have noticed even
Last edited:
Emeraldlady
New member
I’m having trouble envisioning that scenario. Back in the days when we received on the tongue we were also instructed not to bite or chew the host. It’s almost amusing to think of someone bearing their teeth in order to receive.
Emeraldlady
New member
Host’s are made in such a way today that a hairline crack wouldn’t happen. And one of the main reasons for originally beginning CITT was the inefficiency of COTT. Priest were often touched by saliva and people were not properly offering their tongue for efficient reception. Communion in the Hand has proven to be more efficient and sanitary as well as being traditional.
C
CRV
Guest
I don’t find it funny at all. There was one time in the last 3 or so years where the host when placed on my tongue, almost fell, and I did have to clamp onto the host with my teeth to prevent the host falling. I felt awful for doing so, but felt it better than allowing the host to fall, even with a paten held under my chin.
Prior to VII, there also used to be used a housling cloth over the Communion Rail, under which communicants placed their hands to hold up beneath their chin in case the priest accidentally dropped a host/particles etc, in place of a server holding the paten.
Communion cloth
2002 Parish Bulletin - an interesting read.
I had in mind more a crack that could occur during packing or shipping.
COTT must have been efficient for a long time, but then again, in times past fewer people received. Many were not in a fasting state (the three-hour, and prior to this, midnight fast made receiving more difficult), and quite frankly, more people judged themselves unworthy than they do today.
I guess people committed more mortal sins back then.
(Irony alert…)
This is from a schismatic Old Catholic chapel in Florida (Gul/Matthews/Landes Berghes/Carfora lines of succession). That doesn’t make the information therein any less relevant, just stating the fact.
C
CRV
Guest
Yes, thank you for stating that fact. That’s why I said an interesting read. I mainly posted it due to its mentioning why it was used, and the brief history concerning its’ use - as I found the historical dates etc. - interesting.
C
CradleRC58
Guest
Couldn’t agree more.
If there has to be such a thing as CITH, people need to be aware that visible fragmentation can and does occur, regardless of everything that is done to guard against it (sealed edges of hosts, etc.). Refer to the Angelus article I cited above.
Actually, I do not have in mind so much the fervent apostolic Catholic who knows their faith and tries to live it. I have in mind more, to use one example, the giggly, effervescent, callow young person who goes up to receive communion, doesn’t really understand what they’re doing or why they’re doing it, possibly even carrying on a conversation with their neighbor, possibly even chewing gum (it does happen). You know the type. Is this type of communicant going to be detailing their palm and fingers for visible fragments? You tell me. Not everyone is knowledgeable about the faith, nor about the ramifications of the Real Presence.
COTT makes the problem of visible, discernible fragments being inadvertently desecrated much less likely. To reiterate, I have served enough Masses, both OF and EF, to know that such fragments can and do slough off the host and fall onto the paten (if one is used).
If there has to be such a thing as CITH, people need to be aware that visible fragmentation can and does occur, regardless of everything that is done to guard against it (sealed edges of hosts, etc.). Refer to the Angelus article I cited above.
Actually, I do not have in mind so much the fervent apostolic Catholic who knows their faith and tries to live it. I have in mind more, to use one example, the giggly, effervescent, callow young person who goes up to receive communion, doesn’t really understand what they’re doing or why they’re doing it, possibly even carrying on a conversation with their neighbor, possibly even chewing gum (it does happen). You know the type. Is this type of communicant going to be detailing their palm and fingers for visible fragments? You tell me. Not everyone is knowledgeable about the faith, nor about the ramifications of the Real Presence.
COTT makes the problem of visible, discernible fragments being inadvertently desecrated much less likely. To reiterate, I have served enough Masses, both OF and EF, to know that such fragments can and do slough off the host and fall onto the paten (if one is used).
Exactly the thing that should be done.
Good article, though the sidebar “chat” feature, offering the reader the opportunity to chat with Jesus and Mary, was… interesting, to say the least. (I didn’t use it.)
Good article, though the sidebar “chat” feature, offering the reader the opportunity to chat with Jesus and Mary, was… interesting, to say the least. (I didn’t use it.)
- Status